Anything You (are Required to) Say May be Used Against You (as Prior Art): Federal Circuit Upholds Invalidity Based on Mandatory Publication of Clinical Trial Protocol

Attorney: Nicholas Rosa, Ph.D.
May 16, 2024

Clinical trials are a critical part of the development and approval process for drugs, biologics, and medical devices. The lengthy and public nature of clinical trials, however, can create challenges for protecting relevant IP.  A clinical trial is a study or investigation in humans to “evaluate the effect(s) of intervention(s) on biomedical or health-related outcomes.”  42 C.F.R. 11.  Interventions can take many forms that benefit from patent protection including drugs/small molecules/compounds; biologics; devices; procedures (e.g., surgical techniques); treatment strategies; prevention strategies; and diagnostic strategies. Id. <... Read more

When does a drug label induce infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) of a patent not claiming an indication or method of use?

Attorney: Richard D. Kelly
January 23, 2024

In Corcept Therapeutics, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., C.A. 18-03632, December 29, 2023, the Chief Judge Bumb of the New Jersey District Court wrestled with the question of infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271(e)(2) where the drug labels of the generic and ethical drug were identical in the relevant parts.<... Read more

FTC Alleges Misuse of Orange Book Listings: Puts10 Pharma Companies on Notice

Attorney: Richard D. Kelly
November 10, 2023

On Tuesday, the FTC announced that it is cracking down on companies it asserts is improperly or inaccurately placing drugs on the list of FDA-approved products, known as the Orange Book. The challenge may result in removal of products from the Orange Book.<... Read more

Federal Circuit Reiterates What Constitutes A Motivation to Combine, A Reasonable Expectation of Success, and Unexpected Results in New Chemical Compounds

Attorney: Sara Pistilli, PharmD.
August 30, 2023

In Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. v. Incyte Corporation, on August 22, 2023, the Federal Circuit affirmed a Final Written Decision of the Patent and Trial Appeal Board (the Board) of an inter partes review (IPR) asserting the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,249,149 (the ’149 patent) as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The central argument was whether Sun’s “octo-deuterated” ruxolitinib analog (CTP-543) and “tetra-deuterated” ruxolitinib analogs, arising from claim 7 of the ’149 patent, were obvious in light of the prior art references presented by Incyte (Rodgers, Shilling, and the Concert Backgrounder).

Claim 7 recited:

The compound of claim 1, in which the compound is selected from the group consisting of:




or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt of any of the foregoing.<... Read more

No Motivation to Modify Product-Specific Method with Method Features for Different Products

Attorney: Derek Lightner, Ph.D.
July 14, 2023

On July 10, 2023, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reversed an examiner’s finding of obvious on the basis of a failure to show a motivation to modify the prior art and a lack of a reasonable expectation of success. The appeal (No. 2023-002080, USSN 15/558,153, Technology Center 1700) of Ex parte MARK HETHERINGTON began with the filing of a Notice of Appeal on May 13, 2022, after filing the national stage application on September 13, 2017. The main appealed claim recited:<... Read more

Orphan Drug Exclusivity (ODE) – FDA Continues Its Attack

Attorney: Richard D. Kelly
June 27, 2023

Orphan drug exclusivity was created in 1983 to encourage pharmaceutical companies to develop drugs for diseases which affect less than 200,000 persons in the U.S. Jazz Pharmaceuticals developed Xwav® to treat narcolepsy, a rare sleep disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy, voluntary muscle weakness. Xywav® received orphan drug exclusivity until July 2027 when it expires.  Xywav® comprises the drug oxybate as mixed salts of calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium oxybate. The Orphan Drug Act 21 U.S.C. 360 cc (b) provides the exclusivity can be broken if: <... Read more

A Broad Outline of a Genus's Perimeter Is Insufficient For Written Description of the Members of the Genus

Attorney: Marina I. Miller, Ph.D.
April 7, 2023

The Regents of the University of Minnesota (“Minnesota”) appealed from a final decision of the U.S. PTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) holding that the claims of U.S. Patent 8,815,830 were unpatentable as anticipated. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the Court”) affirmed.<... Read more

Federal Circuit Reiterates: Isolated Natural Products Alone Are Not Patent Eligible Without A Markedly Different Characteristic

March 3, 2023

co-authored by Sara Pistilli, PharmD. and Richard D. Kelly<... Read more

Reasonable Expectation of Success in Treating Different Conditions Not Implied by Structural Similarity

Attorney: Derek Lightner, Ph.D.
February 7, 2023

In the matter of Ex parte Taleb, et al., the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determined on January 31, 2023, that an examiner (James Anderson, supported by Supervisory Patent Examiners, Jeffrey Lundgren and Kortney Klinkel) failed to establish the obviousness of claims by failing to establish a reasonable expectation of success in achieving a claimed result of a method claim. The claim in question recited<... Read more

Written Description is Not Always Your Friend

Attorney: Richard D. Kelly
November 21, 2022

While an adequate written description is essential for patentability, 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), like everything else too much can have adverse consequences as uniQure biopharma recently learned in IPR2021-00926 (IPR) involving U.S.P. 9,982,248 (‘248).<... Read more